[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191025081037.GF4131@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 10:10:37 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] locking/mutex: Complain upon api misuse wrt
interrupt context
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 08:36:34PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> Sprinkle warning checks, under CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES. While the mutex
> rules and semantics are explicitly documented, this allows to expose
> any abusers and robustifies the whole thing. While trylock and unlock
> are non-blocking, calling from irq context is still forbidden (lock
> must be within the same context as unlock).
>
> Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
> ---
> kernel/locking/mutex.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> index 468a9b8422e3..7e9c316c646c 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> @@ -733,6 +733,9 @@ static noinline void __sched __mutex_unlock_slowpath(struct mutex *lock, unsigne
> */
> void __sched mutex_unlock(struct mutex *lock)
> {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES
> + WARN_ON(in_interrupt());
> +#endif
> #ifndef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
> if (__mutex_unlock_fast(lock))
> return;
> @@ -1413,6 +1416,7 @@ int __sched mutex_trylock(struct mutex *lock)
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES
> DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(lock->magic != lock);
> + WARN_ON(in_interrupt());
> #endif
>
> locked = __mutex_trylock(lock);
No real objection, but should not lockdep already complain about this?
__mutex_unlock_slowpath() takes ->wait_lock irq-unsafe, so then using it
from an IRQ should generate an insta IRQ inversion report.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists